Supreme Court affirms sanctity of EVMs, paper trail system

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a bundle of petitions that demanded 100% cross-verification of votes cast on Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) with the Voter Verified Paper Audit Trails (VVPATs) or a return to the ballot paper system, underlining that “EVMs are simple, secure and user-friendly” and that the “integrity of the electoral process earned over years cannot be chaffed and overridden by baroque contemplations and speculations”.
The ruling came on the same day as the second phase of the Lok Sabha elections.
Writing separate but concurring opinions for the bench, justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta affirmed the credibility of EVMs and their integration with VVPATs while highlighting the stringent safeguards and protocols put in place by the Election Commission of India (ECI) to ensure free and fair elections.
Both judgments noted the robustness of India’s electoral process and urged a balanced approach to evaluating systems and institutions, as they further underscored the importance of evidence-based decision-making in safeguarding democratic principles. The judges asserted that the Supreme Court cannot allow the entire process of the ongoing general elections to be called into question and upended on mere apprehension and speculation.
The judgments also focussed on the practical challenges inherent in conducting elections in India, highlighting the extensive logistical operations required to ensure access to remote and diverse voting locations, and commending ECI for putting in place a stringent system of checks and balances to prevent any possibility of a miscount of votes.
The judges were in unison that the petitioners’ plea to returning to the ballot paper system is “foible and unsound” as well as “regressive”, having the potential of undoing the electoral reforms carried out till date. The judges further pointed out that apprehensions regarding tampering or data mismatches in the electoral process were “unfounded” in the absence of even a single instance of mismatch between EVM and VVPAT brought on record, defying all logic for the petitioners to demand 100% cross-verification.

Calling the verdict a “tight slap” to the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA), PM Modi said, “With the introduction of EVMs, they are no longer able to play their old game. Hence, they committed the sin of creating distrust against EVMs. They must apologise.”
The Opposition, however, said it will continue with its political campaign on greater use of VVPATs to increase public trust in the electoral process. “We have taken note of the verdict of the 2-judge bench and our political campaign on the greater use of VVPATs to increase public trust in the electoral process will continue,” Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh said on X.
Addressing concerns raised during the hearing, the bench proposed two forward-looking directions to enhance transparency in the electoral system, while clarifying that such directions do not have the effect of interrupting, protracting or stalling the counting of votes for the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.
The bench directed that, on completion of the symbol loading process in VVPATs undertaken on or after May 1, ECI should seal and secure these units in the presence of the candidates or their representatives. “The sealed containers, containing the symbol loading units, shall be kept in the strong room along with EVMs at least for a period of 45 days post the declaration of results,” it said. Forty-five days is the maximum period for a losing candidate to move an election petition against an election outcome.
Read more: Castes from Muslim communities ‘intentionally’ included in backward classes: BJP
Second, the court directed for a verification of burnt memory or microcontrollers in 5% of EVMs per constituency segment by a team of engineers from EVM manufacturers upon a written complaint made by two runner-up candidates within seven days of the poll result. “The actual cost or expenses for the said verification will be notified by ECI, and the candidate making the said request will pay for such expenses. The expenses will be refunded, in case the EVM is found to be tampered with,” said the bench.
The bench rejected the petitions filed by non-profit Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and activist Arun Kumar Agarwal, casting doubts on the reliability of the existing EVM-VVPAT system and demanding a more comprehensive mechanism. Agarwal’s petition advocated for the counting of all VVPAT slips to ensure transparency, while ADR’s petition focussed on enabling voters to confirm that their votes are counted as they were cast. The petitions also sought that voters be permitted to physically deposit their VVPAT slips in ballot boxes. Alternatively, it argued that India should return to the ballot paper system like some foreign nations.
The batch of petitions generated political heat and public interest over ensuring the integrity of electronic voting via VVPATs. This system provides a paper slip confirmation, viewed by the voter through a transparent window, which goes into a sealed cover that is available for verification in case of disputes. Currently, the verification process involves checking VVPAT slips from five randomly selected EVMs in each assembly segment.
Leading the bench, justice Khanna noted that “data and figures do not indicate artifice and deceit”, stressing that “unfounded” challenges revealing perceptions and predispositions cannot cast aspersions on a system vital to India’s democratic process.
“To us, it is apparent that a number of safeguards and protocols with stringent checks have been put in place. Data and figures do not indicate artifice and deceit… Imagination and suppositions should not lead us to hypothesise a wrong doing without any basis or facts. The credibility of ECI and integrity of the electoral process earned over years cannot be chaffed and overridden by baroque contemplations and speculations,” said justice Khanna.
Acknowledging voters’ right to question EVMs’ functioning, the judge urged caution against unfounded challenges, which could erode trust in the electoral process. “Repeated and persistent doubts and despair, even without supporting evidence, can have the contrarian impact of creating distrust. This can reduce citizen participation and confidence in elections, essential for a healthy and robust democracy,” said justice Khanna.
The judge rejected calls to return to the ballot paper system, citing the flaws and logistical challenges it presents. He emphasised EVMs’ advantages, including curbing booth capturing, reducing invalid votes, and expediting the counting process. “In the Indian context, keeping in view the vast size of the Indian electorate of nearly 97 crore, the number of candidates who contest the elections, the number of polling booths where voting is held, and the problems faced with ballot papers, we would be undoing the electoral reforms by directing reintroduction of the ballot papers,” said justice Khanna.
While giving physical access to VVPAT slips to voters will lead to misuse, malpractice and disputes, justice Khanna added, increasing the cross-verification of EVM-VVPAT will not only cause delays in the process human errors in counting but also that the data and results do not indicate any need to do so.
The judge added that the petitioners’ suggestions regarding barcoding of the symbols loaded in VVPATs and use of counting machines for VVPATs may be examined by ECI, clarifying the court refrains from making any comment on these issues.
In his concurrent judgment, justice Datta came down hard on ADR for seeking return to the ballot paper system, stating it “reveals the real intention of the petitioning association to discredit the system of voting through EVMs and thereby derail the electoral process that is underway, by creating unnecessary doubts in the minds of the electorate.” The judge added that he has “serious doubt” as regards the bonafide of ADR when the latter seeks a reversion to the old order.
The judge lamented a fast developing “trend” by certain interest groups to undermine the nation’s achievements. “There seems to be a concerted effort to discredit, diminish, and weaken the progress of this great nation on every possible frontier. Any such effort, or rather attempt, has to be nipped in the bud. No Constitutional court, far less this court, would allow such attempts to succeed as long as it (the court) has a say in the matter,” held justice Datta.
The judge emphasised out that the 2024 general elections, currently underway, present unique logistical challenges, with over 1 million polling booths set up across diverse terrains. “This being the scenario, any comparison of the nature which was sought to be drawn on behalf of the petitioning association (ADR) with a particular European nation (Germany), may not be adequately representative since the demographic and logistical challenges in the conduct of elections in each country are unique to it,” said justice Datta.
Addressing concerns over public trust in the voting system, justice Datta also questioned the sanctity of a private report cited by ADR to question voter confidence in EVMs whereas the use of EVMs has consistently garnered increased voter participation, indicating public confidence in the electoral system.
“The Republic has prided itself in conducting free and fair elections for the past 70 years, the credit wherefor can largely be attributed to ECI and the trust reposed in it by the public… Regressive measures to revert to paper ballots or any alternative to the EVMs that does not adequately safeguard the interests of Indian citizens have to be eschewed,” said justice Datta.
The integration of VVPAT with EVMs first gained legal prominence following a petition by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy after the 2009 general elections. Swamy advocated for a paper trail to augment the reliability of electronic voting, arguing that it would ensure that each vote cast on an EVM is accurately recorded. Although initially dismissed by the Delhi high court, the plea found favour in the Supreme Court, which, in its landmark 2013 judgment, declared the VVPAT system an “indispensable requirement” for free and fair elections.
This system enables the generation of a paper slip for each vote cast, which is displayed to the voter behind a transparent window for seven seconds before being securely stored. This mechanism allows for a physical audit trail of votes cast electronically, serving as a safeguard against potential discrepancies in the electronic tally.
Initially, ECI conducted a mandatory verification of VVPAT paper slips for one randomly selected polling station per assembly segment in a constituency. In April 2019, the top court ordered that the number of EVMs subjected to VVPAT verification be increased from one EVM per assembly segment to five EVMs.